Quote (Handcuffs @ Apr 20 2018 10:04am)

I don't dislike what you're saying because it's contrary to my beliefs at all. I dislike what you claimed to be true about an entire community based purely off of nothing more than anecdotal experience. You keep hiding behind this argument of "Well, you're focusing on my comment about sex workers and Grindr users too much. It was just hyperbolic". It's literally all you presented as your argument early on. I even directly asked you how you drew your conclusion. You had every opportunity to present something more than anecdotal experience, but you didn't. This was the quote-by-quote exchange we had:







So if you want to talk about backpedaling, grab a mirror. You made an ignorant claim about an entire community based off of your anecdotal experience, and rather than admit this to be the case, you want to dismiss it like as though it never happened. It's only AFTER being called out on this weak argument structure that you went out to seek survey data several pages later in the thread. Which, even then, you didn't pull the relevant data to your initial claim from the study you posted. I've already demonstrated that that communities most affected by HIV also have the most serious views on HIV. You can say that "49% is low" all you want, but it's well within reason that there's no way that greater than 49% of straight people in US society consider HIV to be a very serious issue in their lives. Yes, we may not have the actual data on that, but it's an easy assumption to make. inb4 "BUT WE DON'T KNOW FOR SURE" nonsense. It's like how I also don't need a formal survey to guess that gay people are more anxious about family knowing about their sexuality as compared to straight people...

And, it seems like you're the one with a struck nerve. I've never attacked your profession in this thread at all. The work you do is amazing and important, but you don't have HIV-specific work experience or in-depth work experience within the gay community to make such broad-stroke claims like you did. What's an "attack" about that? That's like if someone said that I don't know about schizophrenia because I have neither the formal education nor work experience like you do to make accurate claims about it. If someone said that to me, you know what I would say to them? That I agree with them, because it's true.

Also lol @ "When I made the comment I spoke about grinder cuz I wasn't preparing myself for an academic debate. I honestly did not think you would perseverate on it so much." Translation: I didn't think that you'd focus on literally only the words in my post that you can see, but instead focus on the thoughts in my mind...that I kept to myself.

And I'm not even going to get into the absolute garbage of "You're immune to critical thought". That's some trash nonsense that you can take to General Chat where it belongs, and to see it coming from you is honestly quite surprising. I am capable of critical thought AND so are you. Just because we disagree, and disagree quite strongly as far as PaRD posts go, doesn't make either of us incapable of critical thought. You're easily one of the highest quality posters in PaRD, and always have been and always will be. Just because I disagree with your posts in this thread has changed nothing about that with respect to you in my eyes.

Quote (Skinned @ Apr 20 2018 02:56pm)

So is it a deal breaker or not?

I know a bunch of people that say no; they don't take it very seriously.

Where do you fall?

Its a total deal breaker for me.

Quote (Handcuffs @ Apr 20 2018 06:05pm)

Definitely not a deal breaker, or even an issue at all, big or small. Genuinely curious why it would be a deal breaker for you?

If a person is on sustained HIV medication and gets to a point of being undetectable for 6 months, then there's 0% chance of transmission occurring. Further, there have been 0 documented cases of transmission occurring from someone who is undetectable in general, independent of the 6-month window. Treatment as prevention is one option.

If, however, I wanted another strategy, then I would go out and get on PrEP.

Quote (Skinned @ Apr 20 2018 05:09pm)

Because the risk isn't 0%. Herpes isn't even lethal but its a deal breaker as well.

Definitely risky behavior.

Its a deal breaker because I do not want any STD. I quit smoking cigarettes and eat better to avoid cancer as well, even though treatments are better than they used to be.

I fall into that 35+ crowd though.

Quote (Skinned @ Apr 20 2018 03:09pm)

Because the risk isn't 0%. Herpes isn't even lethal but its a deal breaker as well.

Definitely risky behavior.

Its a deal breaker because I do not want any STD. I quit smoking cigarettes and eat better to avoid cancer as well, even though treatments are better than they used to be.

I fall into that 35+ crowd though.

Quote (Handcuffs @ Apr 20 2018 06:15pm)

To each their own.

Quote (Skinned @ Apr 20 2018 03:16pm)

Minimizing it's risk is dangerous. People are thinking its safe and it is misleading.

Quote (Handcuffs @ Apr 20 2018 06:19pm)

What's being minimized? Do you similarly think that the CDC is being dangerous then?

They made an official statement in 2017 that said there is "effectively no risk of transmission" with people who have been undetectable for 6 months and who maintain their regimen.

Quote (JohnMiller92 @ Apr 20 2018 12:00am)

I don't understand Handcuffs at all tbh. He says he worked at a HIV clinic and was a counselor, etc (which I respect). This obviously shows he understands how bad it is. But then supports a bill that undermines the very system he's helping.

Quote (Skinned @ Apr 20 2018 03:33pm)

In your very specific set of requirements the risk is minimized. But it almost seems like you are referring to remission of the disease...